Title : 梅田のヨドバシカメラ
location: 34.704096,135.496542
Description : 若者集まる梅田には〜安くて楽しい店がある〜マ〜ルチメディアの揃ってる〜みんなのヨドバシカメラ〜でお馴染みの大阪梅田にある超大型家電量販店です。圧倒的な品揃えで値段も安く、高品質な製品を取り揃えています。
Supplemental statement : 大阪梅田エリアにある超大型家電量販店で、多くの人が訪れる重要な場所です。大阪駅や梅田駅などからは地下道や歩行者デッキで接続しており徒歩で安全にアクセスできます。審査よろしくお願いします。
Main image : image
Supplemental image : image
1 Like
To separate the Japanese text from the English text, I am commenting separately.
This is a Wayspot proposal for Yodobashi Camera, an electronics retail store located in Umeda, a busy downtown area of Osaka, one of Japan’s central cities. This is where not only Japanese but also foreign tourists make their so-called “bomb purchases” at this store, which also has a food and beverage district in the basement2F and upper floors. The leased tenants include a number of retail stores from different families, and there is also a hotel on the upper floor of the north wing. It functions as a shopping mall and has excellent characteristics for exploration and socializing.
However, the location photographed and the location designated are completely different. Indeed, the designated location is inside this retail space, but it is not the location photographed. How should I make a decision in such a case?
I have submitted a review as Fake nomination and incorrect location.
2 Likes
Submitters can take a photo of the building and place the pin at a different location, as long as it’s still in the area of the POI. Yes, the front of the shopping center is at 34.703731506739814, 135.49587303063834, with a sign for the camera store out front, and it appears the proposed location is at 34.70411208134725, 135.49651452925275, which, if searching for the store on Google Maps, is closer to where they have it located. That could be were it is in the building.
If you feel that the pin should be moved, do so. If you can’t and you still feel that the location is wrong, reject for inaccurate location and leave a comment as to why you rejected. I also feel that the description doesn’t make this sound like anything more than an electronics store, so if there are places to eat and other stores (I see Uniqlo, which is clothing and accessories, if I remember correctly).
In the end, it’s your decision, but I do see some issues with it if they are nominating the entire shopping center, especially with the description.
Thank you for your input.
Certainly the description and supplementary information description do not promote its function as a shopping mall. I am familiar with the place and could determine that it qualifies, but I think you are right about lack of explanation. The lyrics of the store’s appeal song are included in the description, but may not be appropriate as a description of Wayspot.
I had previously reviewed a store in a shopping mall that I know very well here, but the location was misaligned (I suspect it was intentionally misaligned) and I submitted a review to accept and correct the location. However, when I went to the location later, it was approved at the misaligned location. The corrected location was not reflected. I am troubled by the number of reviewers who accept and not confirm the location of nomination.
This is why I nearly always reject for inaccurate location when the location is suspiciously wrong. I don’t see the point in suggesting a corrected location, which never happens and then my vote has helped a deliberately mis-located (for game reasons) wayspot into the system. I don’t mind if my vote doesn’t improve my rating.
I have seen a featured wayspot live exactly where I moved the pin to, so I know it can work. I would rather move the pin to the correct location to have it go live in the correct spot rather than reject so they can try an abusive pin location again. I don’t spend long looking for the correct location though.
2 Likes
We also have the numerous posts on here where people ask why their nomination hasn’t appeared when they made sure to put in an empty cell but when accepted it’s been moved to the “correct” location.
So it definately works, at least sometimes.
3 Likes
I have also noticed that the location was incorrectly specified, corrected it and submitted a review, which confirmed that it was working effectively. Perhaps it works when multiple reviewers correct the location. It does not work well inside buildings that cannot be verified by aerial photos or street view. That is probably because no one searches and checks floor maps. I am also troubled by the opinion that even if this photo is different from where it was taken, if it is inside that building, it is still good. I would have been more troubled if the location had been designated in the center of the building . As expected, designating the location at another end of the facility, not at the entrance, not at the center, not at the location where the photo was taken, seemed to me to be a deliberate adjustment of the location designation to generate a Pokestop.
That review in the first comment I’d instantly reject, as the photo and the locatoin are so different that they cannot be of the same thing. Either the title is wrong, description is wrong, photo is wrong and/or location is wrong, but they definitely cannot all be valid (and it is deliberate, with no clearly correct location that I could move the marker to for that photo).